AS discussed in our previous episode, we will provide interesting notes on the Sagbayan Peak Resort cases now pending before the Office of the Ombudsman in Manila.
One, the cases involved both administrative and criminal cases due to alleged violations of environmental regulations and lack of proper permits. The resort’s closure followed the revocation of its business permit by the local government of Sagbayan due to these violations.
Two, the Environmental Management Bureau of DENR-7 issued on March 25, 2024 two notices of violations against the resort “for having violated the pertinent provisions of PD 1586 or the Philippine EIS System, and its implementing rules.” The decree mandates that any individual, partnership, or corporation undertaking or operating an environmentally critical project or area must first obtain an Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC). The PEISS aims to balance socio-economic development with environmental protection by requiring proponents of projects that may significantly impact the environment to submit an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
Three, the building of “an access road of about 200-300 meters, a multi-purpose building on top of the mountain and a viewing deck on a cone-shaped hill were already started” by the resort prior to the request for favorable endorsement from the PAMB. This should have been a “red flag” to the PAMB, yet no remedial measures or action were taken, worse, the PAMB favorably endorsed the project, in violation of Section 20(d) of the NIPAS act.
The National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) Act, formally known as Republic Act No. 7586 was enacted in 1992 to establish and manage protected areas in the country. It provides the framework for conserving biodiversity and ensuring sustainable resource use within these designated areas. The NIPAS Act was later enhanced by Republic Act No. 11038, the Expanded NIPAS Act of 2018, which addressed overlaps with indigenous peoples’ ancestral domains and included additional protected areas.
Four, instead of instituting the appropriate criminal and administrative actions, the 2003 CHNM-PAMB members ignored the violations committed, they unanimously approved the request for favorable endorsement for the issuance of ECC, which was later granted by DENR-7. These acts show manifest partiality, evident bad faith or at the very least, inexcusable negligence and gave the resort unwarranted benefit, advantage or preference in the discharge of their administrative or official functions.
Five, the 2003 CHNM-PAMB is composed of 65 members, of which 5 were former mayors, some are alive, some are already dead, like Conching Lim while the 60 are barangay captains of the 5 municipalities.
Six, the same violation kuno applies to the provincial and local government officials of Bohol, DENR-7 and the 2004-2024 CHNM-PAMB members – because of their tolerance of the illegal operations of the resort. The officials referred to are a governor, 3 congressmen, former Governor Art Yap, present and past mayors of Sagbayan, present and past mayors and top officials of 7 other municipalities, some top officials of the province, present and past regional directors of the Office of Civil Defense, a former regional director of NEDA-7, a former regional director of PNP-7, past and present regional directors of DA-7, a former regional director of DOST-7, the barangay captains of Carmen, Sagbayan, Batuan, Bilar, Catigbian, Clarin, Sierra Bullones and Valencia, Bohol, all 214 of them, including a people’s organization chairman.
Seven, there was conspiracy kuno based on evidence, to accomplish their unlawful purpose of allowing the resort to operate.
Eight, the 3 congressmen kuno are “likewise administratively liable when they failed to dutifully discharge their functions as members of CHNM-PAMB, though the complaints against them will be referred to the Committee on Ethics and Privileges for appropriate action.
Eight, a preliminary investigation for violation of Section 3(e) and 3(j) RA 3019 is scheduled on all 263 respondents while administrative adjudication for grave misconduct, gross neglect of duty, conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service will be conducted against all the 262 respondents. Also, an order for preventive suspension was issued against the same number of respondents.
Whewwwww.
Perteng biboha ning kasoha ni.
In our next episode, we will discuss about the 12-peso fee collected by PPA-Tagbilaran.
